Send me email updates about messages I've received on the site and the latest news from The CafeMom Team.
By signing up, you certify that you are female and accept the Terms of Service and have read the
Privacy Policy.

Obama's/Hillary's Backdoor Control!

UN Small Arms Treaty: Barack Obama‚Äôs Backdoor Gun Control May Pass

There are always enemies of individual liberty. Many, in socialist and globalist circles, hate the fact that the common US citizen can exercise his or her liberty of free speech, worship without government intrusion, and is protected by ‚Äėdue process of law‚Äô. However, there is no hate in this world among those who promote and prop up tyranny like there is against the 2nd Amendment: the US citizen‚Äôs God-given liberty to own firearms.

This is why men, like George Soros, put in an ‚Äėhonest day‚Äôs work‚Äô attempting to utilize United Nations powers in order to neutralize US sovereignty and the 2nd Amendment with it. According toJohn Wolverton, II of The New American, Soros is pulling every little string possible to strip your home of its defenses against crime and tyranny:

George Soros is financing the fight to give the United Nations control of your guns.

Through his Media Matters organization, Soros is dumping pro-UN gun control propaganda into the mainstream media to coincide with the United Nations Conference on the Arms Trade Treaty being held in New York July 2‚Äď27.‚ÄĚ

While it is difficult to sift through the various UN treaties, the ‚Äėsmall arms treaty‚Äô is a part of a much larger initiative to curtail individual gun rights. In essence, the ‚Äėsmall arms treaty‚Äô, the ‚ÄėLaw of the Sea‚Äô treaty, and the ‚ÄėArms Trade Treaty‚Äô can be bundled into one giant effort to remove US sovereignty, giving the UN control over the liberties of US citizens, nullifying protections Americans have enjoyed since the birth of the US.

Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton have already vowed to sign such a treaty. In fact, both have largely been working behind closed doors, as they know full-well that Americans would surely show staunch resistance if their agenda committed to ‚Äėopen war‚Äô.

Regardless of how unlikely it would appear that the U.S. Senate would ratify the United Nations Arms Trade Treaty, the antagonism to the right to bear arms in the U.S. by Barack Obama, Hillary Clinton and our elected officials cannot be disputed. While seeming to loathe the Second Amendment, the majority of their efforts to enforce gun control appear to be ‚Äúunder the radar‚ÄĚ to avoid raising the ire of the advocates of the right to bear arms.‚ÄĚ

-Confiscate and destroy all ‚Äúunauthorized‚ÄĚ civilian firearms (exempting those owned by our government of course).

-Ban the trade, sale and private ownership of all semi-automatic weapons (any that have magazines even though they still operate in the same one trigger pull ‚Äď one single ‚Äúbang‚ÄĚ manner as revolvers, a simple fact the anti-gun media never seem to grasp).

-Create an international gun registry, clearly setting the stage for full-scale gun confiscation.

In short, overriding our national sovereignty, and in the process, providing license for the federal government to assert preemptive powers over state regulatory powers guaranteed by the Tenth Amendment in addition to our Second Amendment rights.‚ÄĚ

According to various White House insiders, Barack Hussein Obama has not been idle,saying, ‚ÄúI just want you to know that we are working on it,‚ÄĚ he continues ‚Ä¶‚ÄúWe have to go through a few processes, but under the radar.‚ÄĚ Perhaps, this is why the President has been curiously silent on the subject, as he does not want to attract attention to what he is truly doing through the various UN treaties.

As the United Nations prepares its final push to ratify a controversial gun treaty, the U.S. Senate is set to approve the measure which critics say will not only give away U.S. sovereignty but directly attack the individual gun rights of American citizens, according to a report published Thursday at Stand Up America.

Democrats still hold the majority in the Senate.‚ÄĚ

If we wish to keep our liberties, then we must send a clear message to our politicians ‚Ä¶their jobs will not survive election day if they even consider the ‚Äėsmall arms treaty‚Äô to be a good idea. The disarmament of the American people will signal the beginning of the end of any semblance of freedom we had left. As the saying goes, ‚ÄėHitler, Stalin, and Mao agree ‚Ä¶gun control works.‚Äô

I don't know. I have a hard time reading an article like this because of its bias. I really doubt a lot of other people hate US citizens because of our freedoms. Nor do I think people hate the 2nd Ammendment, but some people do not agree on how it is interpreted and applied.

Therefore since the beginning does not make sense, but uses inflammatory rhetoric, it makes me suspicious of the entire article. I will have to research this some and see if there is any real truth to it, but my first guess is that no, there is probably little to no truth to the claims.

I have a hard time taking info like this seriously too. With the widespread growth of political blogs, people can pass anything off as "truth" and spin a idea so far from its beginnings. I find its best to check the AP, BBC, ITAR-TASS or major newspaper websites.

Quoting rccmom:

I don't know. I have a hard time reading an article like this because of its bias. I really doubt a lot of other people hate US citizens because of our freedoms. Nor do I think people hate the 2nd Ammendment, but some people do not agree on how it is interpreted and applied.

Therefore since the beginning does not make sense, but uses inflammatory rhetoric, it makes me suspicious of the entire article. I will have to research this some and see if there is any real truth to it, but my first guess is that no, there is probably little to no truth to the claims.

I don't know. I have a hard time reading an article like this because of its bias. I really doubt a lot of other people hate US citizens because of our freedoms. Nor do I think people hate the 2nd Ammendment, but some people do not agree on how it is interpreted and applied.

Therefore since the beginning does not make sense, but uses inflammatory rhetoric, it makes me suspicious of the entire article. I will have to research this some and see if there is any real truth to it, but my first guess is that no, there is probably little to no truth to the claims.

The bias is directed @ the gun owner & the 2nd Amendment. Not the President who exhibits a reputation of disrespect for Congress and the Constitution. Unfortunately some who support Barack Obama, his policies attacking our freedoms, will never believe this man is bent on changing America forever and taking our liberties away til it's too late~

I don't know. I have a hard time reading an article like this because of its bias. I really doubt a lot of other people hate US citizens because of our freedoms. Nor do I think people hate the 2nd Ammendment, but some people do not agree on how it is interpreted and applied.

Therefore since the beginning does not make sense, but uses inflammatory rhetoric, it makes me suspicious of the entire article. I will have to research this some and see if there is any real truth to it, but my first guess is that no, there is probably little to no truth to the claims.

The bias is directed @ the gun owner & the 2nd Amendment. Not the President who exhibits a reputation of disrespect for Congress and the Constitution. Unfortunately some who support Barack Obama, his policies attacking our freedoms, will never believe this man is bent on changing America forever and taking our liberties away til it's too late~

Well, the article's bias is directed towards others, not gun owners. If Obama had wanted to enact gun control, he probably would have done it already. I remember when he took office everyone out buying up ammo for fear he was going to take away our guns. Nope, didn't happen, just fear mongering. If the article was correct that you cited, it certainly could have found a more factual and less biased way to talk about it. Stuff like that just puts people like me off, and I'm not even a far left Liberal, just a moderate one.

Also, luckily for me, we own swords, and I have a cool pair of sais, and no one is regulating those!

I guess that's sort of correct. The UK has one of the highest violent crime rate in the world, despite having less numbers than just one of our states. They are considered the Crime Capital of Europe, with higher crimes than America, Canada, Australia and South Africa as well.

That article cited statistics from 2007, and listed 927 murders, when gun control laws were lifted briefly, they have since gone back to tighter gun control. According to the CDC an average of 18,000 murders are committed in the US within the last decade.

As for your second point, if people are the problem, then why give them guns?

Quoting kailu1835:

I guess that's sort of correct. The UK has one of the highest violent crime rate in the world, despite having less numbers than just one of our states. They are considered the Crime Capital of Europe, with higher crimes than America, Canada, Australia and South Africa as well.

Send me email updates about messages I've received on the site and the latest news from The CafeMom Team.
By signing up, you certify that you are female and accept the Terms of Service and have read the
Privacy Policy.